We are talking about the use of
terms, without bothering about the implications of them.

Most of the vocabulary that we
have is a vocabulary - acquired as children - without definition.

There is an index, as when you
point out something to a child and say, “That is a pot, that is a
plate, that is a cup.”

You indicate but don’t define,
and particularly, not the implications. So children are told to be
naughty, or not naughty, according to the mood of the person. No
definition is given adequately to cover the implications of the
term.

We’ll use this particular word
‘unique’ to indicate what we mean.

Now the important thing to note is
this, human beings are unique in the world of living beings because
of vocabulary superiority. They have more sounds, more articulately
manipulated, than any other living being on earth. But these sounds
are learned - in social situations - with emotive tones. So that
when you hear a particular word, you don’t merely get a pure
phonetic unit of sound presented to the hearing apparatus, but it is
accompanied by references to other things (and therefore is
relational) and to emotional tones accompanying the words offered to
you.

Now Greta offered this particular
word. So I can ask Greta what she would mean if she said something
was unique… First, I ask her where she acquired the word… Did
you go into the dictionary Greta?

Greta: No.

Did you hear it when you were a
child?

Greta: Did I hear it when a child?
Yes.

Yes, yes. And did it have a
particular auric association of feeling about it?

Greta: Yes.

And did it seem to you that it was
a good thing to be or a bad thing to be?

Greta: A good thing

A good thing. Did anybody tell
you to be unique is good in those words?

Greta: Not in those words. No….
To be oneself

To be oneself. .. And if one were
one’s self…

Greta: In fact, no. I would not
say that. I think it stemmed from schooldays… To be better than
the others.

To be better than the others… So
there is an implication that if you are unique, emotively, you are
more important than other people.

Greta: Yes, yes.

So that a man like Jack the
Ripper, who was unique in his way, [Yes] must have been better than
other people…[Yes] .. In his own field.

Greta: Yes….. ….

Now this is true - that we do
acquire terms, as babies,, without adequate definition and with
emotional overtones, which condition the way we react to the word.

So, if we draw our famous
three-part man: the think part; the feel part; the will or action
part, in that way. And we put a spinal coordinator down the middle.
You hear a word, which goes through your little place there, and is
recorded in the brain… So that’s in the think department; the
sound has a form.

The sound of the vowel ‘ee’
and the vowel ‘ah’ and ‘oo’ are different sounds and they
have different emotional connotations.

They go into the ear, they record
themselves in the brain; and then they have feeling associations,
because the voice that speaks the word gets its air from the lungs.
… If that looks a bit like an archaic symbol it is quite correct.
It is a phallic power. We will see what we mean by that in a moment.

The voice itself is phallic. ..
Yes?

Let’s see why. … Because that
letter - the ph, or phi, in the Greek – (5.00) means ‘a
situation penetrated’.

A situation, substantially made of
energy is penetrated by another energy. And in the way that it is
penetrated, there is a wrap round the penetrating energy, and that
is represented by the ‘L’. So the function of phi-losophy and
phallus-ophy are very intimately related.

The superiority of the human being
over the animal world depended upon the human being’s capacity for
mimicry. You know that human hunters copy the sounds of birds, and
of animals, that they are pursuing. And they can dupe an animal into
thinking an animal is there, when really it is a human being voicing
an animal sound.

So the human superiority to the
animal consists in a mysterious way - as the ancients in all the
major religions said, - somehow man is total animality. He is not
just a snake in the grass, he is a kangaroo, and an elephant, and
anything whatever that any animal can do, man can impersonate
effectively enough to dupe the animal.

It does not matter that today we
use electronic instruments to dupe animals and we can do this very
easily. We can actually draw on the edge of a film a geometrical
configuration, which when played back through the instrument will
give the sound of a cuckoo enough to deceive a cuckoo. Because we
can analyze the sound made by the cuckoo and we can record it, put
it on an oscilloscope, photograph it, draw it on a piece of paper,
modulate it, draw it on the edge of a film, play it through the film
and fool the cuckoo.

Now the other animals don’t do
this so efficiently. Many animals mimic and deceive each other:
protective coloring, and the coloring of predators like the spots on
the leopard or the stripes on the tiger. They are methods of
deceiving by misinforming. They inform you amiss. The strips of the
tiger in the bamboo, the spots of the speckled light of the forest
with the leopard, are deceiving tricks.

Now we want to examine this very
carefully because the ‘phi lambda’ there - those two fundamental
letters in phi-losophy and pha-llus, are set in opposition with
another word lu - I will put the ‘S’ at the bottom. –
‘Phi-lambda’ means ‘reason’ because the circle is that
whereby we circumscribe any situation whatever. We make a Venn
diagram in this way, we analyze it with logic, we cut the circle in
various ways. The symbol of the cutter is the rod, so that the
letter ‘O’ symbolizes the situation in its passivity - the
feminine aspect - and the rod symbolizes the interfering force -
masculine aspect. And because the rod laid across that circle will
divide the circle in a certain way, it gave rise to the concept that
we call ‘pi-ratio’, ‘phi-ratio’.

If you remember that the letter
‘L‘ and the letter ‘R’ are the same letter, produced in the
same part of the mouth, but in the case of the ‘L’, you just
wipe it once, in the case of the trilled ‘R’ you repeatedly wipe
the tongue there, and this trills that in the same place as the ‘L’.
So the difference in the R and the L is that the R is rapidly
differentiating while the L is binding together. So, when we look at
this pair of letters, the ‘phi’ and the ‘Lambda’ - the ‘F’
sound and the ‘L’ - together they give the method of logical
analysis. A situation cut with some device, penetrating it and
dividing it into right and left, and thus giving rise to the concept
of ratio and relation. 10.00)

Now the word relation means ‘to
lay a thing back on another thing’. If we take the circle and put
the rod on it, we see immediately that the two halves of the circle
are symmetrical, and we can fold one half onto the other half and
that is to re-late it - to lay back one half on the other half ; and
the figure, being symmetrical, the two halves are congruent and
equivalent to each other.

Now the use of that little concept
by the Greeks and the Egyptians, and the Babylonians, and the
Hindus, was that they were creating a device for analyzing any
situation whatever that could be circumscribed.

Now when the process of
rationalization – that’s ‘phi-law’ - was completed - the
function of the analysis having been made obvious - you did not need
to be bound by your logical analysis. You could disobey it if you
wished. And therefore, the word ‘loose’ was used in opposition
to it.

First you made your ‘phi-law’
rational analysis, and then you let yourself ‘loose’ from it.
Those that are called - in religious terms, - two keys; one of
binding, one of loosing. The binder is ‘Pha- la.’ The ‘looser’
means ‘to play’. You know the word ‘loo,’ apart from the
place where people go to meditate, is also the same base as in the
word ‘Ludo’, a game, ‘ludere’ ‘to play’ and so on.

To let oneself loosen the logical
implications of one’s analysis, having performed the analysis you
then have two conditions; a thoroughly rationalized situation
‘pha-la’ and a liberation from the analysis,’ lus’ Both
together constitute the basic weapons of the science of the last six
thousand years. Phal-lus, that means make your analysis complete,
down to the every minutest detail, and then, having made it, cut
loose. Plotinus put it in the way, “First perfect your reason,
then take the flight of the alone to the alone,” - loose yourself
from your definition.

Now why should we when we have
made a perfect rational analysis of a situation, bother to cut loose
from it?

If our analysis is perfect, had we
not better keep it? Well, let us keep it. But are we to subordinate
ourselves to it?

Once upon a time there was a thing
called Euclidian Geometry and it was supposed to be absolutely self
evident, self-consistent, beyond argument – triangles have three
sides, and the number of degrees in the three angles equals added up
to a certain number, which some of you might remember, if you are
young enough. And that was invariable. And if you actually drew a
triangle on a surface that was flat, you could demonstrate that and
measure it. But supposing, using the same motions with the same
compass, you drew that same form on the surface of the sphere. Now
the lines would then be curved and the number of degrees in the
angles would not be the same. So then we have another kind of
geometry. Instead of having a two-dimensional flat geometry we have
a spherical geometry. And in fact we can make an infinity of
geometries by drawing the same primordial shape on different shapes
of surfaces.

So, those people who, for a couple
of thousand years, were intimidated by the Euclidian definitions,
found it very hard to accept that there were other kinds of geometry
possible. Geometry was established and perfect and beyond argument.
But we can draw geometries in spaces which are electro-magnetically
fluctuating at any given moment at a given periodicity, that would
break all of the Euclidian rules. Therefore we can say this, - when
we have made a complete analysis in a given situation and we can
say, “Phala, phala, phala, we have done it.” You know that
occurs in a lot of songs - folk songs - doesn’t it, the fala,
falo, etcetera, which means I have really got control of the
situation. That would be fine if the Universe were static. (15.00)
But the Universe is not static. The Universe is nothing but
energy in a perpetual state of flux moving from an earlier
condition, through time, to an open-ended undefinable. And on the
way towards that undefinable it is going through myriads of changes
that make it necessary for us to throw our ‘phala’ away and be
‘lus’. Therefore loose means not only ‘not tied’, it also
means light, it is directly related to play and the ‘lux’ in the
Latin ‘light’ and the ‘lume’ as in luminosity, all come from
the same base. So that we have, in fact, a strong warning in one
word, phal-lus. Phal- lus means ‘define it but do not be
intimidated by your own definition’.

Now it is obvious, that the first
beings to discover this process; the very careful, formal analysis
of a situation could give you control of the situation, providing no
other beings had made the same analysis and providing the situation
remains sufficiently slow-changing for your analysis to be
applicable. Now it happens, and I think you will find this through
personal self-examination, that the beings who discovered this
process, were rational beings. They were men, who discovered it.
Males discovered it, and now we are going to see why.

It was a function of vocabulary,
and the shape that we drew inside here is a phallic shape because it
was through shouting and mimicry of the animal world that certain
beings discovered that they could influence, flow into, a situation
with words, sounds, very economically.

That is to say, a big muscle man
might want to thump a small man into obedience, but when there are
lots of small men about it often became inconvenient. And, if you
had a tribe of a few thousand, you might not have time to get round
and thump them all. And then, one day, a man thought, “If only I
can invent the word ‘thump’ and then ask the whole tribe in a
formal gathering, would you like to be thumped?” And demonstrate
what thump means in public, then the tribe can decide whether they
liked it or not. You know that the result of this brilliant idea was
a gathering together of the peoples, an announcement made to them by
an articulating being. And he defined the situation, and he had
large muscle men with him, and a few captives to demonstrate on. So
that you can get a man; you can have him thumped in public and say,
“Listen to this sound”. (Thumping sound) Now we will say that is
a thump, it will do, if I had a bigger chest it would be a bigger
thump. When this sound is made, say, “When you hear me say this
word ‘thump’ I want you to visualize this big strong man hitting
this little weak man.” And then, having demonstrated it, “Now
who else in the audience would like a thump? Now who would like to
demonstrate this? Have we got a small, not too strong person and a
large, strong person in the audience who will be prepared to
demonstrate this for us? Or would you say that your imagination is
enough?” …………..

Imagination is enough! The only
reason that imagination is enough is because you have ancestors for
thousands of years who have been seriously thumped, very hard, in
public, and their protoplasm has been modified, and the continuity
of this protoplasm from generation to generation makes you not need
a demonstration. So that means that you are fundamentally nervous
about a word because of its emotive associations based on some form
of physical activity in the original demonstration.

So we will examine this ‘unique’
word. Obviously the first part, the ‘uni’ has a meaning. You
hear it in other words, ‘unify’, ‘unit’, and so on. (20.00)

Now let us analyze it in its
primary phonetics and see why it means what it means. The ‘oo,’
you form that ‘oo’ sound - in English you say ‘eyoo’ because
the English are very good at distorting everything, but in most
sensible languages on the Continent, that same letter is ‘oo’
not ‘eyoo’.

The English use diphthongs where
decent people don’t.

The ‘oo’ means ‘drive’, it
means ‘push’, it means ‘force moving’. Such that when you
see that ’oo’ if I draw you ‘oo’ in ancient Egyptian. I’ll
draw it for you,… I hope it is big enough. …And if I draw it in
Hebrew it’s like that, That is a ‘wow’ in Sephardic, and ‘vov
… vav’, Germanic, and quite simply it was a drawing of the male
organ, pushing.

It is our letter ‘F’, so all
we have done is take that rude-imentary drawing there and say we
have heightened it, for decent geometry, and we will call it the
letter ‘F’. The ‘F’ is simply a drawing of the male organ,
which is why one of them is longer than the other there, one bar,
this one is the left one usually, statistically, the other is the
right one. That one is a pendant organ; it is an ‘F’-ing letter.
It is the first letter of the word ‘force’.

Now, these mysteries come out of a
structure of thought called Cabala. Now Cabala’ is based on the
letter ‘Q’. When we look at this primordial drive, we see that
really we are talking about a relationship, in which a situation is
driven into by a penetrating force. Now don’t confine this down to
the merely physical aspects of sexual relation in the animal or
human world. Think of it cosmically. Any force whatever in the whole
universe, that pushes into any situation - which is another force,
but relatively passive - that is a sexual relation in the highest
sense of the word. So we are not to confine that word ‘sexuality’
merely to the behavior of animals and humans at the physical level.
We are to remind ourselves that we are talking about cosmic energies
where one of them travels through the other.

We take our letter ‘U’, here,
and we will put the penetrating force there. Now that is a very
simple, primitive diagram of a force penetrating a situation, and
bending the situation that it enters into. So the word vulva, (ua),
you know in Latin you say ‘oo’ not ‘ver,’ don’t you?
You’re supposed to say, “wedi, wici,” in the best classical
mode, not, “vedi, vici” and so on, right? ‘Vedere’ means ‘to
know’, ‘videre’ means ‘to see’, and fundamentally it is a
drawing which occurs in its most primitive form as a simple scratch
on a piece of stone to remind a governor of his function.

Something has got to give; it
doesn’t have to be me, right?

So hold one hand up, grip your
fingers together, your four upright fingers as hard as you can so
that nothing can get through them, then put the thumb of the other
hand in the space between two of those fingers and push and see if
you can stop, with your fingers, your thumb, from pushing through…..
Are your fingers strong enough?

Audience; No.

No! Because they haven’t had
enough practice closing as the thumb has in pushing.

Observe that the practice of the
pushing in the presence of unpracticed receivers of pushes means
that somebody gives in. The one that is giving in (25.00) is
called ‘vulnerable’, and it’s exactly the meaning of this
diagram. There is always a force operating on a situation, and if
the situation is relatively passive, or does not gather itself
together strong enough, it will be bent.

Take a bit of your paper and push
your finger into the paper and the paper will give way and the
finger will represent that letter ‘I’ and the paper will
represent the letter ‘U’ wrapped round it.

Now, when we come to consider this
we can say therefore, this closed situation, the letter ‘O’
penetrated by a force, the letter ‘I’ can be represented after
the penetration by a ‘U’ for the ‘O’ and the penetrating
force going into it in that manner, so the same letter could mean
either ‘O’ or ‘U’ according to whether you were considering
the situation to have been penetrated or not.

So the very same letter, this
Hebrew letter here which is a Spanish, ‘wow’, that letter can be
used in Hebrew for either ‘O’ or ‘U’, the very same letter.
Because it could be a closed situation not yet attacked and
penetrated or it could be a situation that has been penetrated. And
it would be the same letter, but you would pronounce it slightly
differently, an ‘or’. You would mimic - remember it begins with
mimicry - you would mimic it by making a round mouth, ‘or’ –
pure. Not an ‘O-U’ as in English ‘own’, a pure Yorkshire
‘aw’.

Now you will feel that the mouth
is like a sphere when you do that, and then, when you have done
that, push your lips forward and repeat it. You see how the ‘or’
becomes ‘oo.’ You cannot push your lips out while you are
voicing that without changing ‘or’ to ‘oo’. Also you cannot
make that ’oo’ sound without protruding your lips a bit.

So many designs of vases were made
by doing copying the lips pushing forward, and we find very, very,
great satisfaction with certain shapes because they remind us a
fundamental of appetite. The ‘awe’ - the situation - when it is
about to be penetrated, can open its mouth and push its lips forward
and embrace the invader. Thus giving rise to that wonderful weapon
used by ladies for defense against men, called ‘Uterus’.
Oo-teroos is the final defense of the relatively more passive.
Namely, allow the invader in … and then dine on him.

Now that was a very primitive
analysis, and very effective, and, funnily enough, it still works.

Now, when we look at the letter
‘N’ you pronounce this letter ‘N’ by making the shape of an
‘N’ in your mouth. … I don’t want to remove those, I will
ask you to think about it.

The floor of your mouth, the roof
of your mouth - there is the floor, there is the roof - you put your
tongue from the back of your throat, up towards your teeth and
palette behind the teeth so you have a shape like that. Now just
turn it round and it is the letter ‘N’. You pronounce that ‘N’
by going ‘nnnnnn’. Now you will notice that when you do it, you
have closed your mouth but somehow, air is coming up the pharynx and
down the nose, so the word nose, actually, is nothing but an
extension of the issuance of that primordial ‘nnnnnnn’. Make a
nice long ‘nnnnnnnnnnnnnnn’.

Now, isn’t that a nice warm
sound? But funnily enough, it means ‘to negate’ in the very
moment of apparently opening. I open my mouth to say, “Yes,” and
I put my tongue in the position to say, “No,” and what I say is,
“Nnnnn-yes,” which means no-yes.

The ‘N’ means negation but,
because you can continue to make that ‘N’ sound, it is a
continuance, hence it’s use in the continuous forms of verbs
(30.00), whether in English or French or German or Italian.
Whatever it is you find, singing, the ‘N’ in the termination
‘ing’, or the termination ‘ant’, or the termination ‘end’,
the ‘N’ is the constant and means continuity. So that ‘N’
has a double function. It means to continue and to, together.

So if we now take the drive
concept of the ‘oo’ and add to it the ‘N,’ and say, ‘oonn’,
we are symbolizing and vocalizing a primitive sound which means
moving continuously, driving continuously - the continuity of drive.

So ‘oonnn’ - as long as you
keep that ‘N going it means you are continuing the action
symbolized by the letter preceding it. So ‘ooo,’, ‘to drive’;
‘nnn,’ ‘oonnn’ means ‘drive continuously’. Remember
that, because the word ‘noose’ - ‘nowse’ - ‘intelligence’
- means the ability to detect what is of no use and throw it away.
N-O-U-S nous, nowse, intelligence, is the ability to detect what is
of no use and throw it away, or sell it to somebody who does not
know it is no use. That is the mark of intelligence in humanity.

Now the letter ‘I’ - again it
needs to fool you by making a diphthong, say ‘I-E’ -‘ah ee’
- and if you wrote it with a letter ‘A’ - pronounced ‘ah’,
and a letter ‘I’ pronounced ‘ee’ and say it both together
‘ah-ee’, ‘ai’. But the reality is that that little letter
should be pronounced and is, in respectable languages, ‘ee,’ not
‘ai.’ The second element in the English diphthong ‘ahee,’
‘ee,’ is correct. It is made by a dot. ‘e,’ the primordial
sound for a dot, and that dot is pushed through space like that and
continues. And the travelling dot, or punkt, or point, or yud, or
jot, means ‘the line generator’. So that when we take this word,
‘uni’ we are saying, push continues to push on a line. Then we
have ‘unity of intention’, ‘unity of purpose’, and a
guarantee apart from earthquakes, of success in arriving.

Now we will go on to the next part
of the word. This means drive continuously on to the point thus
generating a line. The ‘Q’ part here, the ‘uni-Q’ - the
first letter, the ‘Q,’ thrown out by the Greeks because it was
too rude for their delicate souls, they retained ‘Kappa’ and
threw out ‘Coppa’. Hebrew has retained both, the ‘kaffa’,
‘kaf’, our letter ‘K’ and the ‘Q’. But the Q was
pronounced down the well of the throat with a sort of hard coughing
action, and correctly pronounced it is quite simply a cough like
this ((cough) that is the way to pronounce ‘Q’,, and you are to
think of the ‘alloa’, the tone column, as they call it in bell
canto, coming up from the larynx and the air is pushing through the
larynx like that, and into the pharyngeal space. Driving through it,
it is making exactly that same thing we defined before as the sexual
relation. The pharyngeal situation is penetrated by an air column
and the sound is ‘k,’” and when you made a strong effort to do
something you did that, (harsh coughing sound), and primitives would
pronounce it that way, even today.

If you were to travel to where
there were primitive peoples, say in Australia, or New Guinea, or
parts of Africa, you will find that in their dance motives, when
they are singing there is lots of ‘uuhh’ to go with the rhythm,
and it means, ‘make super efforts if you wish to penetrate that
situation’.

Then we have a repetition of the
drive, and then we have the letter ‘E’, and the letter ‘E’
is the fifth letter of the alphabet which is a ‘hey’ in the
Hebrew, and means life itself. (35.00) A life made by a drive
continuing to posit a point and push it through a resistant
situation but overcoming it, continuing to drive, and this makes
life unique.

Now supposing as a child, Greta,
you were told this is what unique meant…Mmm? …. That you
couldn’t be it, unless you gathered yourself together, with all
your power. Drove, very hard. Continued to do so, in the presence of
all opposition, on a defined point going towards a goal. And that to
do this you would have to overcome resistances in the environment,
and you must actually overcome them, and continue to drive. And if
you keep on doing this, really do this, you will really be alive.
And if you do that you are unique, and if you do not you are not.

Now when you were taught that word
‘unique’ in that passive way did you think it meant all that
recommendation to total self-dedication of the absolute wholeness of
your energy? No?

Supposing you had been what kind
of a girl would you be now?

Greta; Something inside me said I
would not be the woman and I resent that.

No of course you wouldn’t. You
would have got a ‘tash’ like Lord Kitchener from World War One,
and you would be going like that saying, “You country wants you,”
wouldn’t you? Well do you prefer your present condition?

Greta Do I prefer it?

Yes.

Greta: I want my own uniqueness.

Your own uniqueness? But there is
only one kind of uniqueness isn’t there? That which is attained by
this dedicated drive. Now if you wished to define yourself as ‘The
Queen of All Passivity’, and you drove all your energies toward
passivity, you could be a unique woman.

Greta: That seems like a
contradiction in terms.

Contradiction?

Greta: Yes, drive into passivity.

Yes but it must be a possibility
mustn’t it?

Greta : Yes it is.

Because passivity means the energy
is accepting what is coming to it.

Greta : Yes.

Now if you can accept absolutely
what the universe is doing, you do what William Blake said about
reality, “This world is a fiction made of contradictions.” You
contradict yourself. You know, ordinarily you do not like to be
passive unless it is pleasant. But it is actually possible to be
deliberately passive when it is not pleasant and that really fools
everybody. Yes? So it could be possible to say I will be what people
think they mean by being feminine, but I will be it deliberately so
I will be secret man behaving like a woman, and I will conquer by my
submission. When you do that technically, you are a Muslim.

Greta: Unless that is what I would
see except a man changed to be a woman would he remain a male?

Quite.

Greta: The same drive as …..

That particular man of a sex
change remained a man and he deliberately behaved as if he were a
woman and had anatomical alterations to make him able to behave like
a woman, but he was still a man. So he could do it. Likewise any
woman could do it if she could control herself and stop trying to
seize the initiative. What she usually does is make herself passive
when it is pleasant, and then very actively, aggressively resistant
when it is not. And thus she does neither efficiently.

Now the big rule for all
primordial magic success. You must take the whole of yourself, you
must aim that at a defined point and without deviation, and without
any other consideration, use the totality of your energy to get
there, and then you must become it, even if it were
self-contradictory. Mmmm? Because all is energy, and energy can
contradict itself. Because in fact, this ‘I’ and ‘O’ show
you because both of them are energies and one has elected to stand
still and the other to push into it because it stands still, but
both of them are modalities of an Infinite Field of Sentient Power.

So that Infinite Field of Sentient
Power has itself chosen to be actively passive (40.00) and
passively active. That is the whole meaning of the cream of Hindu
philosophy - the Bhagavad Gita. That Lord’s song is about nothing
except the art of acting without regard to the fruits of action, but
with due regard to what is and is not the reality. That every
situation is passive-active/active-passive, and you can chose a role
of active-passive or passive–active if you are conscious of both
your possibilities. And then whichever you do you are active,
whether you are actively-active or actively passive you are still
active, and therefore, by definition, male. Yes?

Now, the word ‘unique’ then,
has tremendous associations, implications in the word. But, most of
the words that people use are not analyzed in that way; and children
do not acquire them in that way, and therefore they are bound by an
unanalyzed passive element of vocabulary - very strong emotional
charges which place them at the mercy of the sound when it comes.
They are conditioned in an emotive socio-politic economic situation
to respond to a word.

Let us take the word, ‘work’,
and the word ‘play.’ Is it not true that they do not have the
same emotive association? … Why not? … Well because they have
totally different meanings. Play is ‘pee-lay’. You place
yourself in a laying position, you make yourself passive to an
impulse, to an energy, and you let that energy dictate to you what
you will do, and you deliberately give in to it, and it is called
play. But the moment you ‘organize’ yourself - that’s the
‘O-R’ in work - where you have a defined place and you would
differentiate and discriminate its content very clearly. And you
fixate, lock it up, so the definition can’t escape, and then you
drive - that is the ‘W’ at the beginning - and you drive (‘W’),
because the moment you move, you create a back motive power that
opposes you to the degree that you move. So the ‘W’ in the word
‘work’ is to remind you that when you push, you generate
opposition. And that if you are going to get on with your work, you
will have to overcome the opposition; push into the situation:
discriminate the contents of the situation, and tie up the situation
hard, so that it can’t escape. Now that is work. So the word work
is the opposite to the word play, isn’t it?

Now, you are taught, and certainly
since the building of the pyramids, you are taught that organized
applications of forces, of energies, of power, change situations in
an orderly manner which is predetermined by some intelligent being,
the work-master. He organizes the labor force, and he makes it work.
And very, very often, in the Ancient World, there were literally
millions of people engaged on a magnificent project of architecture,
required to cut out ten-ton blocks of limestone, and carry them, and
put them in position. They did not know what they were for, they
were told to do it and there were men there to make them do it, and
they did it, and this was associated with the word ‘work.’

So, the word ‘work’ to us is
‘irksome’, ‘work-some’, whereas when the work was done and
the thing was up, everybody admired it, you could lie down for a bit
until the next pyramid was ordered. And when you were laying down
you were taking it easy and the sun was shining on you and you felt
fine. And because of the emotive associations of thousands of years
of being compelled to engage in an organization action of energy,
the word ‘work’ has got this association of difficulty and drive
and organization, and to many minds all things horrible that we
would rather do without.

Whereas the word ‘play’ means
exactly, ‘to lie in the sun when you have done all the work’ and
you are allowed off in, I think, fifty-two weeks in the year, and
you are allowed a couple off, once, or possibly twice, a year by
kindness (45.00) of the government, to get you fit to go back
to work. Because they know if they work you all the time without the
rest on the seventh day and your two weeks holiday and the gap in
your two weeks holiday, you will undoubtedly run berserk and start
screaming the place down and muck up the job. Because running
berserk was very, very common when the taskmasters were too tough
and too heavy with the whip.

Somebody told me a Jewish joke a
week ago, about somebody who was rowing down the Nile, as a slave,
rowing Pharaoh’s boat. And the taskmaster was lashing them away
like mad and suddenly one of the Jewish rower slaves turned to his
friend and said, “Leichman. How much do you tip the whipper?”

Now there is a very deep
psychology in that because in every situation in the Jewish mind,
which is based on this symbol, pronounced ‘Yahweh’, or ‘Hi
Hu’, or ‘Jehovah’ in its corrupt form, meant, ‘in every
situation there is something you can get out of it already’.

So you are a slave rowing and your
muscles are getting better. Maybe they will get so strong you can
beat the bosses a bit. So keep quiet a bit, and if he has got a nice
wife when the rowing is good, smile, maybe she likes smiling rowers.

Now Joseph got promoted like that,
and like Joseph, know when to refuse an offer. Remember he refused
an offer and got thrown in jail. And in jail - that’s the ’oo,’
because he had refused the offer - he became a great dream
interpreter and became Pharaoh’s right hand man. So it says there
is no situation where you cannot capitalize on it if you are
intelligent. Don’t sit down and mope in jail. Get to know the
warders and the other prisoners and see if they need a cigarette.
See if they need something that you have not got but you know
somebody who has. That makes you a ‘middleman’.

So, here we are with a very simple
proposition. We have imposed on us, as children, words without
definitions, but with very strong emotional charges upon them, and
they are re-enforced over thousands of years by continuous
representation as facts. You would not ordinarily think that we, are
daily and nightly presented with threats, would you? Unless you
watched the TV and see what happens to heroes? Does not every
situation show you men being shot and beaten up? Aren’t you really
just as presented with the threat and the offer of a thump only
disguised in the forms of plays and films and jests and so on?

Now the function of the play in
the Ancient World was called ‘cathartic.’ Now quite simply, that
word means ‘enough to give you diarrhea.’ That’s what it means
catharsis. Think about it, mmm? It means you present a drama in
which some young fellow with great intelligence objects to being a
slave, either of humanity or of the gods, it does not matter which.
All the way through that play he is going to do very well, up to the
last act. In the last act, do you know what they used to do in the
Ancient World? They used to take their best actors who played the
part, and he would take a bow and go off, they then brought a slave
in, dressed like him, and murdered him on stage. And that was
cathartic. That meant ‘do not want to be a hero’. You have been
identifying with him all the way through the play up to the time his
head came off, and then you would breathe a sigh of relief and
applaud.

What are you applauding? You are
applauding that it isn’t you. Now, there is no other ground of
applause, when you go to the theatre. Mmm? Think of all the people
that applaud at a Beethoven concert. What are they applauding about?
I’ll tell you what they are applauding about. It is marvelous
violin playing, but the audience did not have to do the practice.

Now anybody who has worked very
hard at any skill knows that is true. To be any good at anything is
murder - of you. You are really a scapegoat to show what good
performance means. It is absolutely exhausting. Now the audience
knows it, they see the perspiration rolling in great lumps down the
toil-struck brow, and say, “My God, he is working.” (50.00)
And they applaud and say, “Oh let’s go quick to play and have
a little chat about it, and drink.” … And he is trying to
recover. He will have a coronary in no time if he does not watch it,
through his dedication to the work And we will always remember him.
He died in harness entertaining us who don’t work.

So the fundamental idea of all
dramatic presentations in the Ancient World was to impress the
audience with the inadvisability of revolution … and it is still
used for the same purpose.

Now, let us apply this principle
to another word. We had, didn’t we, something about what is the
difference between conscience and consciousness? Is there a French
speaker in the house, lurking about somewhere, disguised? What does
the word mean in French, that we use for conscience in English? …
Has Hannukah slipped out?

Audience: Yes.

Is she lurking somewhere like a
midget?

Hannukah: It is the same word.

It is the same word. Would you
mind pronouncing it down your nose like a true French girl please?

Hannukah: Which word?

The one that we say ‘conscience’,
in English.

Hannukah: Conscience (spoken with
French accent)

Yes ‘conscience’, nnnnn. …
Well actually ‘con-science’, yes? ‘Con-science’ –
‘with-together-knowledge’. Now science means, ‘S-C-I’, which
means ‘to cut’. The same root as in ‘scissors’ and ‘scythe’
– ‘to cut’. And the ‘ence’ at the end of it means ‘be’
- the essence of the thing.

‘Science’ therefore, means you
take being and cut it in little bits and find out what the bits are
and when you know what the bits of the thing are, in relation to
that thing, you are a scientist. Now, therefore, a rationalist
people like the French say this ‘conscience, is consciousness,
because by means of cutting it to pieces you become conscious of the
parts as well as the whole.

Now it has an emotive association
engrafted upon the word in English, and it is something that makes
you feel awful. Isn’t it? Conscience. Think of that double ‘N’
in it. Say the word, “conscience,” and let the ‘Ns’ last a
bit. Connnsciennnnce. It feels horrible, “connnsciennnce,” it is
very, very impeding.

Your totality of knowledge is your
conscience, and that is why conscience is not a valid ground to
justify or condemn any activity. Because your conscience, your con-
science - your knowledge – changes. As you develop and grow up and
learn, your knowledge extends, and consequently your conscience
extends. So your conscience is really very flexible, and will not do
for an absolute statement of a truth. Your ‘con-science’,
acquired through cutting your sense organs later, up, that
‘con-science’ is changing every day and is not a valid ground
for making a pronouncement about anything other than the particular
things it has cut to pieces.

Audience: Why does consciousness
make cowards of us all?

Well, every time you think about
what you know about a thing. And when you think about what you would
really like to do if you didn’t know about it… mm? For instance,
there is a lady sitting next to you, isn’t there? She is the wife
of a man next to her, mm? Now when you remember that, your knowledge
inhibits you. Right? So conscience doth make a coward of you. The
word ‘coward’ means ‘Q-guarder’, ‘Q-warder’,
‘Q-guarder,’ guard your genital organ.

You know what they used to do -
and they would re-introduce in certain parts of Islam today - if you
are naughty, they will cut it off. Now, when you remember that fact,
if you think it is worth keeping, you become a coward. That is a
‘Q-guard’. (55.00) because you have remembered that
society does not let you do it. ‘Thus conscience doth make cowards
of us all’. But then, the other part goes with it, ‘And thus the
native hue of resolution is sickled o’er with the pale cast of
thought’.

Now how many times do people find
that their will is one thing, and their conscience, their total
intellectual furniture, is another? The will would do this, and the
con-science says, “Yes, but somebody is looking.”

There are cameras in Liverpool in
certain positions and they are trained on the roads. And, if they
like to play back the records of those they can see one fellow
breaking the rules and get his number from that record, and he can
be found and charged because he has been watched and this is
happening more and more and more. Any time there is a public
demonstration, the ringleaders are photographed by TV cameras, the
whole film is examined to see who has got the initiative, and then
the ones with the initiative can be picked up and removed and
everything goes quiet. There are only five percent of people with
any initiative so it doesn’t need much to sort people out really.

So here we are, with primary
sounds which we have learned as babies without adequate definition
but with emotional charges that actually control our lives. Now what
are we going to do about it, if anything? Think, “How very
interesting”, and then forget all about it.

Now this depends entirely on the
temperament of the person. If the person who hears that wishes to
develop full, total, efficiency of life function in himself or
herself, then the obvious thing to do is get to know more and more
about these primordial roots of words, and how their emotive
associations were accreted to those words. Because once you
understand how they got there … then you can begin to release
yourself from them.

Let’s take a word like the word
‘man’. Now man is made of a base ‘ma,’ which means ‘mother.’
It does not matter whether you go to darkest Lancashire or highest
alti-Himalaya.’ Go to Tibet and say, “What is the name of the
feminine ruling power of the Universe?” and they say, “Ma.” So
it does not matter whether you go in a Chinese take-away in
Chorlton, or whether you go to Tibet, ‘ma’ is ‘ma’
everywhere. Why? Because ‘mmm, mem’, closed mouth, ‘mmmmm’,
is the primary sound that woman makes to herself when she is
contented.

Now it is the same sound that baby
makes when he is being breast-fed. There is a little term called
‘yumming’. You know the word ‘yumming’ in ‘yum, yum, yum’,
that is copied from babies, nursing. And they have got the mouth
full and therefore closed but when they are satisfied and they feel
like a little gurgle and go ‘mumumumum’ and so probably their
first words will be, unless you hit them hard suddenly, ‘Ma’,
not ‘Pa’. They go ‘mumumum’, so that word, that primary root
‘ma’ the mother principle, was actually the base of the word
‘man.’ Now will somebody offer, from what we have already said,
how did it get the ‘N’ on the end of it? …What turned ‘ma’
into ‘man’? … Negation.

Negation. Now how can you become a
man if you don’t finally break from your Ma? You have to able to
say, “No,” to Ma. You know very often a full-breasted woman with
a child, she has got more than the child needs, and at some point,
the child turns away, ‘nnnnn’. And this goes ‘ma’ and it
goes ‘nnnn’. Now if it does it effectively it is called ‘mann’.
The woman is then very proud you see, and says, “Oh you little
thing. I must keep hold of him, must chase away all other women
because when his father dies he will lovely to have about the house.
Because he can say “Mannn”. And you will notice this peculiar
sound in naughty boys, they love it. Have you noticed it, that
little boys when you push them (60.00) they go “Nnnnnnn,”
you see? ‘Ma’ - primordial substantial appetite. ‘M-A-nnnaa’
the negative activity turned ‘ma’ into ‘man’, and this
negation is another word for self-control.

Negation, and control, and
discipline and every word of any value whatever in relation to
efficiency is based on negative controls. That is, you take your
‘Absolute Infinite Primordial Appetite’, and you get hold of it
and tie it up. And, when you can tie up your own energy,
deliberately from within yourself, you have turned from ‘ma’ to
‘na’. And that same devil, ‘Mana’ in Polynesia is called
magical power. There is a whole theory among anthropologists about
this mysterious power of ‘Mana’. It is really very simple. The
fellow, who can control his own appetite and conceal it, is much
better off than the fellow who goes about, as they say in primitive
language, “Gawping”. How would you like to go walk about like
that all day? ….

They would think you were a member
of Mau Mau wouldn’t they, yes?

Now, when you are able to negate
that and shut your mouth so that somebody does not know that you
want a grape. And imagine a small boy standing in front of a bowl of
grapes, and he is only a visitor in the house and he … what does
the owner of the grapes think? I have actually seen this happen. I
remember as a child myself when I ate a grape, and some ladies in
the house I went to, do you know what they used to do? Quietly
remove the grapes.

While, if you kept your mouth shut
and looked through the window like this they thought what a
tinsy-winsy, little appetite that child has got, and walked out of
the room. And then, of course the grapes went (whistle) like that.
So that the ability to hush your mouth was very, very, very
important. And the only difference between a king, a priest, and a
commoner, was the ability, primarily, to keep the mouth shut, not
gawp about the place, to negate one’s own appetival tendencies,
and thereby to become ‘man’.

Now, supposing, when you were at
school and you were doing a bit of elementary anthropology and the
teacher said to you, “You are a member of mankind, and that means
you are a rational being.” What would you say to that? What is he
trying to do to you if he says you are a member of mankind?

Audience: Tie you up.

Tie you up. Well, first of all you
have got to be a ‘man’ that is negate your appetite, then you
won’t be such a pest in society, and then you have got to be kind
as well, and ‘kind’ just means remember your kin, your kith and
your kin, your family and divide your family, that is the letter ‘D’
at the end, from all other families, and then you are kind. So, if
you are born a Bavarian, you are kind to Bavarians in principle, and
if you meet an Italian you are not kind, and you don’t have to be
kind to an Italian because you are not of that kind.

So the wars in Scotland that
allowed the English to conquer the Scots were wars where a clan in
this little valley, and a clan in this valley were distinct, they
were not kin, there was no kinship there and no necessity for
kindness because they were not of kin. And the people who wished to
control their tribes always tied them up with a definition of
difference.

Now the most extreme form of this
definition of difference was invented by the Jewish thinkers who
brought forth the concept of ‘The Chosen People of God’. They
said that God has a unilateral pact into make one peculiar people
into the people that would eventually benefit the whole of mankind.
To Abraham a promise, “In him shall all the nations of the world
be blessed” And coming out of that line, (55.00) through
David the King … And the scepter shall not pass from there until
Shiloh comes. Till he whose it is by right arrives, the authority
remains in that line.

Now Christianity was built by a
Jew who revolted against the idea that only one people was elect of
the human race and said, “No, this dispensation was made for all
linear descendants of Adam.”

Now that was a great revolt
against the idea that a particular people, who today we call the
Israelis, were the only elect people, elected by God. And this
Jewish fellow, Jesus of Nazareth, said, “No, it isn’t true. It
is from Adam where the election is. God made man, as opposed to
sub-man, as opposed to apes, He made man there to rule on Earth, and
he is the elect of all living beings. The human race is elect.” So
he said that.

Now after that came Mohammed
amongst an Arabian people who were largely polytheistic and he
realized they needed reformation. But what had been said of the one
God by the Jewish prophets, there is one God and His name is One,
His power is One, and there is no other God. But that was kept to a
select people and it had it be spread. And Jesus had said he came to
fulfill that law by reminding them that the human race was included,
and not merely a little section of them. Mohammed came, said the
same thing and therefore, he said, you must recognize that the
people of the Book, that is the Jews and the Christians of his day,
were telling you about the One God as opposed to the many gods. And
there is only One God and that God is Absolute Power, Absolute
Intelligence, Infinite Comprehension, and that no finite individual
human being in a body can usurp the position of the Invisible
All-Intelligent Power. But we have to co-operate with the Jews
because they were the inventors of the monotheistic concept there is
only One supreme God.

In India you have got literally
thousands and thousands of gods and they are all more or less on the
same level and worth worshipping. Although they have a concept of a
super god in India, how far that concept borrowed from the Judaic
concept through trade relations, the scholars differ.

And then we have this Muslim
statement which carries on the dispensation of Christianity and of
Judaism, “There is only one God.” And all human beings, all in
the line Adamic, as it says in the Koran, all of the Adamic line are
the elect. As opposed to the animal world and the vegetable world
and the mineral world, it is the human world.

Now if that is so, and if you care
to read in the Koran you will see there that the Jews who are true
Jews and the Christians who are true Christians, are accepted by
Muslims who are true Muslims and the rule is very simple in the
Koran. “If you do not give to another person that which you would
like for yourself, you are not a Muslim, you are not a Christian,
and you are not a Jew.” Only if you are prepared to give to other
people what you value for yourself, and share it with them, are you
a true Muslim.

That means to say that Iraq and
Iran, fighting for the sole possession of a port in the Gulf are not
Muslims, though both sides say that they are. They are not truly
Muslim, because each side wants the control, but by Muslim law, he
should want the control for the other side as well as for himself.

Now how many Muslims are true
Muslims, how many Christians are true Christian, how many Jews are
true Jews? To be any one of those three religions you have to say,
“All human beings are identical genetic protoplasm, they are
really extensions of the same Being, and in principle can
co-operate. And all they have to do, in fact, is do what they can do
in principle.”

Now that is all hidden in
terminology, taught to people and not defined adequately (70.00)
but emotive tones are built up. So there are people who were born in
a certain civilization and brought up as Muslims in Iran, in Iraq,
in Turkey, and elsewhere, as others are brought up Christian and
others are brought up Jew. And there they are, and today they are
fighting each other and many of them - by the hundreds of thousands
- are giving up that religious belief in favor say, of communism, to
fight against that religious teaching, when what they should be
fighting against is the corruption of it, not the teaching. The
teaching of the unity of the human race is absolutely true. The
teaching of the necessity for intelligent co-operation is absolutely
true. The abuse of that teaching by any given section is no disproof
of the truth of the teaching.

So, when we get all these
differences, apparently, of sectarian religions, it is terminology
that has created that difference, terminology undefined. Because you
get a simple thing, Muslim is related to certain people who believe
in the Prophet Mohammed. But the same word exists in Hebrew and
means exactly the same thing - it means ‘submission.’ So
‘masleem’ and ‘Muslim’ both have the same meaning, and one
is Arabic and the other is Hebrew; and they both mean ‘submission
to the will of God’, and Abraham, therefore, was a Muslim.

So we see, an undefined term with
an emotive association can be very dangerous. So, unless we get to
the bottom of this terminological difference, and release ourselves
from the emotive overtones of it, we will remain continuously at war
with each other - either openly or covertly. And when the next war
is fought, as a big convention of scientists recently said, and the
system breaks down, there is a high probability that the condition
will be like primitive man before there was a system to help them to
relate, and they’ll rove in bands, like wolves, destroying each
other if they meet. There will be total chaos. That is the
prediction by some scientists, today, of what is likely to happen.

Now as long as people have
erroneous ideas derived from undefined vocabulary, charged with
emotive associations the high probability of that happening is with
us.

So, it is for each individual to
decide how much energy is available to investigate fundamental
concepts.

Let us take the word ‘love’
again. The word ‘love’ – we’ve dealt with it before - you
can’t deal with it too often. People learn this context in a
situation where as babies, “I love you,” is accompanied with a
gesture, arms round, and you feel comfortable and relatively warm;
and “I hate you,“ it has a different facial expression and a
pushing away with it, so the word ‘love’ tends to mean,
‘emotively, arms round and comfy’. That is not its meaning. The
word means ‘laboring for the development of the potentialities of
being’. So, you don’t love anybody unless you work for their
development. That is the only valid meaning of that combination of
primary phonetic elements. You have an ‘L’ there which means the
work factor, the lamed, the lamda, an ox-goad, drive yourself; bind
yourself to the situation; the ‘O’, before ‘V’, the
development of ‘E’, the life. It is to drive oneself in every
situation to develop the life potential of that situation is love;
anything less than that is not love.

It does not matter what we call
it, it may have nothing to do with arms round and cuddliness, it may
have to do with the opposite. It might have to do with telling
somebody very clearly, but not dogmatically, but clearly, that
certain factors are better taken into consideration than not, and
then that person having been told, is not to be compelled to do it,
because the highest respect (75.00) has to be given to the
free will of every individual being, as a zone of activity of that
Infinite Universal Power, which itself posits us and of which we are
modalities.

So we see that this unique word
has tremendous significance, hasn’t it? And in conscience, and we
had another one, didn’t we? What was the other one?

Audience: Principles before
practice.

Principles before practice.

Audience: Fact before fiction, no
fact before fallacy was the other statement for the human being.

Fact before fallacy, principle
before practice.

Audience: Principle before
practice, yes

You didn’t mention the fallacy
line have you?

Audience: No I didn’t …. …

Fact before fallacy

Audience: Fact before fallacy.
Yes.

Before fantasy or fallacy?

Audience: Fallacy

Fantasy. Did you say fallacy a
moment ago?

Audience: Fantasy.

No did you?.

Audience: No, I didn’t say that.

No but did you?

Audience: No.

Did anybody hear you say fallacy?

Well I , and I think I have got
some agreers. Now it could be that fallacy and fantasy are all mixed
up, and it could be they are both mixed up with sexuality.

Audience: Yes.

Because all fantasy, you know the
word ‘fanny’ is a euphemism for the lady’s genital department
isn’t it? ….

And it means vanity, which means
that which vanishes, and that means the opposition that collapses
under attack and that was attributed to the female that gave in when
pressed hard. And the fallacy was to believe that it wouldn’t, and
therefore never to try.

Think how much nervousness there
is in men who are only ‘ma’ and very often not quite ‘na’
yet, because the maturation of man is the ability to negate the ma
in himself, think how many of these ‘maa-’ beings have not
attained full self-negation power over their own appetite and in
consequence, are terrified of their own female aspect inside
themselves. They are afraid of running amok because of their own
feelings of unformedness within. And because that unformed-ness
possibly over-riding their logic they are frightened also of
external women.

Do you know that lots of men are
intimidated by the feminine? They really are. It is understandable
because when they were about so big and Momma was nursing them,
occasionally, playfully, she choked them and then said, “I could
choke you,” or, “I could eat you.” And the child,… It has
happened before, I mean it has happened. Not only rabbits eat their
young, barmaids do. You have never seen a barmaid with a baby have
you? You can’t say they are celibate.

So, we have this strange fact that
the man afraid of the feminine in his own being, because of its
irrationality, tends also to be afraid of the feminine outside him
in the woman and therefore, to be ruled by women through unconscious
fears of their non-rational capacities. Because they can behave in
such a way that all your masculine negation power which we call
intellect is crowded out of existence by a sudden irrational
tantrum. So that fallacies and phantasies arise where the phallus is
not sure of itself. Is not sure that when presented with an
opposition that it has the capacity together itself together and
drive through it.

Audience: Is that why highly
academic people can sometimes appear very insecure?

Mmm, and the more intellectual you
prefer to be the more evidence there is that you are afraid of the
non-rational. Why bother to stabilize yourself in intellect unless
you think something can over-ride you? In our thought, intellect is
only a tool to give you a technique of attaining your volitional
ends?

So you get a lot of highly
intellectual-like men who are quite feminine in their own self,
(80.00) very much either mother dominated, or afraid of
women, and particularly afraid of their own irrationality. And
therefore, they throw themselves into self-intellectualization to
make themselves secure…..

Now ‘principles before
practice’. Imagine a situation where protoplasm - and that is all
we are, organized in more or less complex ways - protoplasm,
originally, was quite simply a kind of colloidal shaking mass in a
primitive ocean. Only later did it fall onto centers and make
mono-cells. So its first sentient experience of itself is one of a
diffused, not adequately defined, tremulous anxiety. It’s not yet
made itself into a being. It has not yet got a center. And then,
somehow mysteriously, some scientists think it is caused by
lightning striking into this chemical mess, caused a falling onto
centers of the chemistry of that primal ocean, and there appeared
little dark spots in little masses of protoplasm, and that little
spot is the letter ‘I’, the dot of the ‘I’, the Yud of the
Cabala. It is the principle of individuation, the prince-ipal, a
pi-ra in that place, a principle. Because from the moment that that
centralization has occurred then the Infinite Universal Power
pressing into that center, pushes through that center and the center
is a little transformer, and it pushes out to the periphery of that
primitive cell, and pushes the cell out. And begins to move about in
search of food.

The principle therefore is that
pi-rational behavior that arises from the first positing of a
central nucleus in the protoplasm. Then the pira-actice having got
this principle, this pi-ractional center, then you begin to activate
through the center. Because, before the center, the whole mass with
no little dark dots in it was a blubbering, shaking, tremulous,
vaguely sentient, anxious non-being, with no demarcation. But from
the moment of that center, the energy can go through the center to
its periphery, push it out, make pseudopodia, make false legs,
extend them, deposit calcium in them, make bones, produce the
vertebrates and so on, finally, up to man himself. And he does it by
‘pi-ra–activation’ – ‘practice’.

,Instead of waiting for the
stimulus to hit him from outside, he feels inside, when the stimulus
comes whether the stimulus is worthy of his attention. If it is
worthy of his attention - his tension - he tenses on it, he holds it
and he activates himself on his evaluation of the worth-whileness of
the stimulus. Not the stimulus determines him, but his evaluation
made by his nuclear will determines what he will do.

Now when that is done from center,
the ‘pi-ra’, the rational function in the nucleus of that egg,
gives the orders from in the nucleus by its own self-evaluation of
the importance of the stimulus, and it pushes out ,and it shapes
itself in accordance with its judgment, and that shaping is called
worth-shape which later was contracted to the word worship.

So that all true worship starts in
the center of being and defines the kind of being that it wills to
become. It sits down and writes its definition so it doesn’t
forget it.

And then, having defined it, it
activates itself on the basis of its own definition and therefore
makes itself into a shape (85.00) which is worthwhile to it
because it conforms to its own definition of that shape which is
most efficient for the pursuit and attainment of a goal defined from
within the center of being. And that is Absolute Self-determination.

When a being does that adequately
it means that the Infinite Power of the Absolute Sentience has
posited that protoplasm, entered it, set up a little reference point
within it, that ‘yud’ point, that jot, and then pushing through
that little jot has organized that protoplasm in a very individuated
unique way.

And that is the total fulfillment
of the will of the Absolute for that being. That being is then
unique, has a conscience, that is, a totality of knowledge to date,
and a practice of a principle, and a method of overthrowing
fantasies and escaping fallacies. So that all of these things come
together. And we arrived at all of this by starting with a simple
little word.

Can we say that the definition
when we look at that word now, is quite the same as it was when we
were babies? No. Can we say that, “Why bother with it, it is
useless?” Or can we say, “That is very useful.”

That means I have a principle
inside my own being which is absolutely central, which is absolutely
valid, which in religious terminology is God posited, as stated in
the Book of Genesis, “God breathed the spirit of life into man.”
And he became a living soul, a solo, a being on its own, there,
within, on its own, because it owes to the Absolute this positing,
within a universe with infinities of other such centers, all posited
by the same Absolute. And therefore to whom we have a peculiar kind
of cosmic relation such as if we behave in a relational,
intelligent, purposive, mutually loving - equals developmental way -
we are doing two things simultaneously, the Will of God and the
certain development of our own talents.